<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>GitOps on Wolkwacht</title>
    <link>https://wolkwacht.nl/tags/gitops/</link>
    <description>Recent content in GitOps on Wolkwacht</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://wolkwacht.nl/tags/gitops/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Secrets Management Showdown: Azure Key Vault CSI Driver vs. External Secrets Operator</title>
      <link>https://wolkwacht.nl/posts/2026-09-05_secrets-management-showdown--azure-key-vault-csi-driver-vs-external-secrets-operator/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://wolkwacht.nl/posts/2026-09-05_secrets-management-showdown--azure-key-vault-csi-driver-vs-external-secrets-operator/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;img alt=&#34;Two secrets-management paths lead from a secure vault into Kubernetes workloads&#34; loading=&#34;lazy&#34; src=&#34;https://wolkwacht.nl/images/2026/feature.svg&#34;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The real question is not whether to use the Azure Key Vault provider for the Secrets Store CSI Driver or the External Secrets Operator (ESO). Instead, it&amp;rsquo;s whether your workload should access secret data as &lt;strong&gt;mounted files&lt;/strong&gt; or via &lt;strong&gt;native Kubernetes Secret objects&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That choice influences application design, rotation, incident handling, RBAC, observability, Helm compatibility, and GitOps. In short: &lt;strong&gt;CSI offers a more secure default for applications that consume files; ESO provides a more practical platform default when Kubernetes-native compatibility is a priority.&lt;/strong&gt; This decision involves both GitOps and security considerations.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GitOps on Azure Kubernetes Service: Building a Production-Ready Platform with Flux</title>
      <link>https://wolkwacht.nl/posts/gitops-on-azure-kubernetes-service-building-a-production-ready-platform-with-flux/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:42:06 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://wolkwacht.nl/posts/gitops-on-azure-kubernetes-service-building-a-production-ready-platform-with-flux/</guid>
      <description>Kubernetes platforms seldom fail due to the technology itself; instead, failures are usually caused by operational issues.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
